Depending on the weapon used.....a trail of debris along the direction of travel to the crash site. Flight 93, had an impact point, with debris
carrying on in the general direction of travel indicating the airplane was intact until it impacted the ground.

Wrong. The Boeing 787 is the first Boeing aircraft that is fly-by-wire. All Airbus aircraft are fly-by-wire, but Boeing has only recently gone that
route. And the pilots are in total control over the aircraft. It's not a "the computer controls the aircraft and the pilot is a passenger" role
that people claim. The pilot is in total control over the aircraft at all times. The difference is that the controls respond faster, and smoother
than a traditional pulley and wire system that has been used until recently.

yes , and i believe the fairies and pixies are running wall street so everyone`s money is
fantabulous.

I refuse to take part in this childish debate ....none of these debunkers have anything to say other than "no"... these new debunkers have a serious
problem ... they DO NOT follow their own theory (THE O.S ) ... so i will now refrain from posting in this thread unless i feel like my post will be
adding information to the thread , as i feel the debunkers are hovering ... waiting for a chance to derail the thread ...... SORRY O.P but this is how
911 threads go on here , what can we expect from a "controlled" website.

MODS : please check out the debunkers in here as we have a little ego problem , again , and i feel that this thread is about to be hijacked by
extremist nutjobs like many excellent threads before.

NOTE : I am open to all opinions and theories , untill they get border-line pathetic.

Heres the deal.

This forum is for the discussion of the subject matter.

Discussion most certainly does not mean closed minded, one sided, dismiss everything put in front of you by people with good knowledge,
pat on the back "yes you must be right" pandering to your opinion.

It means the exchange of ideas and mulling possibilities.

What you term to be "debunkers" are people potentially with more knowledge than you on certain subject matters who have a different
opinion to the one that you have.

And if you can't engage in a civilised discussion with them without resorting to petty bickering and a refusal to even consider another persons point
of view then maybe ATS is the wrong place for you to be.

This forum has VERY strict rules on the whole 9/11 discussion subject and that's because zealots from both sides of the debate simply want to butt
heads with each other and then resort to acting like they're still in the schoolyard. Don't fall foul of that.

That's the only warning I'm going to post, because I should have 9/11 trolled your post above.

No. An air to air missile is usually made up of between 20 and 80 pounds of explosive or so. It also usually doesn't detonate on contact with the
target, but has a proximity warhead that throws out shrapnel. This gives it a better chance of hitting the target, without having to actually hit the
target.

The AIM-7 Sparrow, has a warhead of 88 pounds. The AIM-120 AMRAAM, has a warhead of 50 pounds in the A/B and 40 pounds in the C. These are radar
guided missiles, and would track on the largest radar target, which would be the fuselage.

The AIM-9 Sidewinder has a warhead of about 21 pounds. This is an infrared missile, and tracks on the engines or the APU.

This is 200 grams of Semtex placed inside the rear cargo hold of a Boeing 747 that was pressurized. As you can see it leaves huge pieces of
debris.

If Flight 93 had exploded in midair, there would be large pieces of debris laying on the ground all around the area, and the debris field would look
nothing like it did. The impact site is consistent however, with an aircraft that did a nose dive into soft ground.

It is a philosophical and moral dilemma (there is even a game theory attached to the concept)...but I have to go Machiavellian on this one as a) the
passengers are already destined to die if the hijackers succeed and b) it sends a messaage to future potential hijackers that they (and the plane)
will be hunted down to prevent them from crashing it into strategic infrastructure or iconic symbols of the republic and killing many additional
citizens as well. It is a hard decision on the one hand (morality) but an easier one on the other hand (big picture - saving lives). The question is
did they have a chance to shoot down planes or were air force assets diverted to prevent same??

If Flight 93 had exploded in midair, there would be large pieces of debris laying on the ground all around the area, and the debris field would look
nothing like it did. The impact site is consistent however, with an aircraft that did a nose dive into soft ground.

A nosedive into soft ground is also consistent with a shootdown especially if there is a trail of minor debries.

The hypothesis presented by some people, that a large debriefield where a plane has been blown up into little pieces is indication of a shootdown
seems to be wrong. To achieve what some people describe the crashsite to have been like in their minds it would have been necessarry to detonate
explosives throughout different segments in the aircraft.

No it isn't. There would have been debris scattered for miles if it was hit by a missile (not paper and light debris). All the debris field was
within that field where it hit. There was no large or heavy debris anywhere else, except what could have been thrown by impact.

This has been the issue for years and the answer has been given many times. I do not understand why it is so hard to understand the mechanics of it
or the logic of the event. If it was shot down then we should have seen the debris field stretched along the flight line or parallel to the flight
path due to the winds. But we never do and all debris starts from the impact zone and goes downwind. Heck I have asked many times for just one, one
solid tangible hunk of debris that was found along the flight path. Never have seen it.

I have said before, if I was supplied with actual evidence of a shoot down, I'd take a more interested look into the claim. But there has never been
any.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.